Narendra @ Naresh vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 9573 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 326/2021

Narendra @ Naresh S/o Prakash Chand, Aged About 17 Years, B/c Meghwal, (Minor) Through His Natural Guardian Father Prakash Chand, R/o Siyat P.s. Sojat Road, Pali. (Petitioner Is Confined In Childrens Home, Dist. Jalore).

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

2. Ram Chandra S/o Kuna Ram, R/o Ramasani Bala, P.s. Sojat, Pali.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Narendra Singh Rajpurohit, Adv.

                                 through VC
For Respondent(s)          :     Mr. Mool Singh Bhati, PP


              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
                              Judgment / Order

26/05/2021

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner (juvenile- through his

natural guardian father Prakash Chand) as well as learned Public

Prosecutor.

The allegation against the petitioner is of offence under Sections

363, 341, 376(3), 506 IPC and Section 5(j)(ii)/6 of POCSO Act. The bail

application filed by the petitioner under Section 12 of the Act of 2015

before Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Pali was rejected

vide order dated 15.02.2021. Being aggrieved by the said order, an

appeal was filed by the petitioner before the learned Session Judge, Pali

and the same has been dismissed by learned Appellate Court vide

impugned order dated 24.02.2021.

Being aggrieved of the orders dated 15.02.2021 and 24.02.2021

passed by the Courts below, the petitioner has preferred this revision

petition before this Court.

(2 of 3) [CRLR-326/2021]

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is

below 18 years of age and he is inside the jail since 11/10/2019.

Counsel further submits that the statement of the prosecutrix has

already been recorded before the Principal Magistrate and no other

criminal case is registered against the petitioner. Further there is no

evidence to show that if the juvenile-petitioner is released on bail, then

his release is likely to bring him into association with any known

criminal, or expose them to moral, physical or psychological danger, or

that his release would defeat the ends of justice. It is argued that

learned Courts below have not appreciated the fact that the petitioner is

juvenile and entitled to get benefit of provisions of the Act of 2015.

Section 12 of the Act of 2015 clearly provides that if the accused is

juvenile, then he should be released on bail, but learned Courts below

fully ignored the provisions of the Act of 2015. The petitioner is in

custody since long time and no further detention of the petitioner is

required for any purpose. Learned counsel for the petitioner further

submitted that the gravity of the offence committed cannot be a ground

to decline bail to a juvenile.

On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor defended the

impugned order passed by the Juvenile Justice Board in declining the

bail to the petitioner as also the judgment passed by the Appellate

Court upholding the order passed by the Juvenile Justice Board.

I have carefully considered the submissions made by the learned

counsel for the parties and also perused the provisions of the Act of

2015.

The language of Section 12 of the Act of 2015 conveys the

intention of the Legislature to grant bail to the juvenile, irrespective of

nature or gravity of the offence, alleged to have been committed by him

and bail can be denied only in the case where there appears reasonable

(3 of 3) [CRLR-326/2021]

grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring him into

association with any known criminal, or expose him to moral, physical

or psychological danger, or that his release would defeat ends of justice.

In this context, I have also scanned through and perused the

orders passed by the courts below. Having carefully examined

provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act vis-a-vis the orders passed by the

courts below, I do not find that any of the exceptional circumstances, to

decline bail to a juvenile, as indicated in Section 12 of the Act of 2015,

is made out.

In view of the aforesaid discussion, this revision petition is

allowed and the order dated 15.02.2021 passed by the Principal

Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Pali as well as order dated

24.02.2021 passed by learned Session Judge, Pali, declining bail to the

petitioner are hereby set aside.

It is ordered that the juvenile accused-petitioner Narendra @

Naresh S/o Prakash Chand, shall be released on bail in FIR

No.315/2019, PS Sojat City, District Pali upon furnishing a personal

bond by his Natural guardian, in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- along with a

surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Principal

Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Pali; with the stipulation that on all

subsequent dates of hearing, he shall appear before the said court or

any other court, during pendency of the investigation/trial in the case

and that his guardian shall keep proper look after of the delinquent child

and secure him away from the company of known criminals.

(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J 78-MS/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)